vsbattlesfandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:Chaos (Monster Girl Quest)
Wasn't this verse banned? I seem to recall that there was a discussion involving this verse before and it was banned due to porn reasons... DontTalk (talk) 01:39, June 5, 2017 (UTC) Second time I'm sayin' this but... After a talk with Ant, he agreed to allow it here, considering that we already have several other Eroge or just plain explicit verses on the wiki. Obviously as long as the profiles stay SFW Saikou The Lewd King (talk) 01:41, June 5, 2017 (UTC) High 1-B I think that High 1-B is dumb. A Wave-Function could be 4D even. Matthew Schroeder (talk) 03:03, June 5, 2017 (UTC) It's a bit too late for me to debate properly, but it's closer to the "There is X thing, this must mean that the setting is Y dimensional" thing that Homestuck uses Saikou The Lewd King (talk) 03:09, June 5, 2017 (UTC) You should preferably create a discussion thread for this. Antvasima (talk) 08:59, June 5, 2017 (UTC) A wave function is not infinite-dimensional. This is a misunderstanding of what wave functions are (they're not even objects, obviously). Wave functions can potentially be multiplied by each other and create a Hilbert Space, but in some cases Hilbert Space itself is not infinite-dimensional. Wave functions existing in a verse doesn't come remotely close to qualifying for High 1-B. Also, it is meaningless in the first place unless these are physical hilbert spaces that actually exist, as any regular person can craft a theoretical hilbert space through mathematics.Azathoth the Abyssal Idiot (talk) 09:15, June 5, 2017 (UTC) I agree with Azathoth. And before anyone brings up The Endless, they have logically far more reasons to be ranked as High 1-B then that. They being Wave Functions is only the cherry on top of multiple other evidences. Matthew Schroeder (talk) 16:30, June 5, 2017 (UTC) To be honest your infinitely layered on itself thing doesn't sound much more High 1-B but whatev. I yield for now. Too tired and sick and blargh to debate. Do you guys think High 2-A would still be appropriate, given that exist before the multiverse as a whole and stuff or should we keep it at 2-A? Saikou The Lewd King (talk) 21:28, June 5, 2017 (UTC) High 2-A is fine. Matthew Schroeder (talk) 21:46, June 5, 2017 (UTC) High 2-A How does existing before the space-time of multiple multiverses qualifies for High 2-A? Ultima Reality (talk) 16:23, June 5, 2017 (UTC) I also want to ask the above question. I mean just consider that existing before the multiverse isn't different than existing before a single universe, just that this single universe was by chance also the first one in the multiverse. Aside from that I don't see the correlation between time of existence and 5-D power. DontTalk (talk) 22:00, June 5, 2017 (UTC) Isn't the multiverse itself considered to be 5-D if it has 4-D universes? Especially since we tend to treat existing before something (Like time) meaning to transcending it. Wouldn't that apply to the multiverse? I just feel like destroying the content of an infinite multiverse and destroying the very fabric of multiples multiverses to be quite different tier-wise. Saikou The Lewd King (talk) 22:50, June 5, 2017 (UTC) Given all of the above discussion, I will change the profile to 2-A for the time being. Antvasima (talk) 05:17, June 6, 2017 (UTC) However, there is another issue: Wouldn't being an embodiment of nonexistence, like Oblivion, mean a 1-A ranking? Antvasima (talk) 05:21, June 6, 2017 (UTC) Oblivion wouldn't even be close to 1-A if that was the reason for him being 1-A. It's for being the embodiment of nonexistence that exists beyond an infinite-dimensional multiverse. Azathoth the Abyssal Idiot (talk) 05:24, June 6, 2017 (UTC) Okay then. Antvasima (talk) 09:54, June 6, 2017 (UTC) @Saikou: To the first question, no. If that were the case every multiversal character would be High 2-A. "Especially since we tend to treat existing before something (Like time) meaning to transcending it." That is a rule I have never heard of before and that makes no sense. For example if I exist before cars, I dont transcend cars and neither do I have power over them. Or take the following example: Let's say there is a fiction without a multiverse, where a character existed before the universe. Then at some point in time another character comes into existence capable of creating a multiverse and does so. Since this character came later the character that existed before the universe also existed before the creation of the multiverse. So if that rule were true it would mean that the character, that was not above 2-C at the beginning, would due to the action of multiverse creation, that didn't change him in any way and is completly unrelated to him, somehow got a powerup to High 2-A. That should be quite obviously wrong. So since the rule would cause quite obvious logic flaws it can not be true. (Aside from there being no reason for it to be true to begin with.) To the last argument: First an infinite multiverse and infinite multiverses are the same thing, it is just a game of drawing arbitrary borders. I don't get where you take the fabric part from, but destroying the fabric of a multiverse is also not different from destroying the fabric of multiple universes at once. So if the former was low 2-C the latter is 2-A, not High 2-A. DontTalk (talk) 12:36, June 6, 2017 (UTC)